Category Archives: Uncategorized

After taking part in the heated discussion in ASTU class earlier last week, I feel like I gained more insight on the topic from both sides considering I was put into the assessing group. Before the debate started, I gathered information on the subject and tried to put myself in the shoes of the ‘for’ group first. I thought about which points they might argue and how they would support those ideas. As ‘for’ the ‘against’ side, I mostly focused on how they would perhaps respond to the claims of the ‘for’ side and how they would go about refuting those claims.

To my surprise, some things discussed were things that I had thought of beforehand, such as the case of reliability and social media. After partaking in the debate, I can safely say that most of my views on the Castell’s reading remained the same even after both groups displayed their own views on it. I felt like the ‘for’ group mostly addressed how the news of the revolution spread with the help of social media and that social media had most certainly allowed this sort opportunity ‘for’ the revolution to gain more followers. The ‘against’ side had some interesting things to say about this exact topic, they argued how social media was in fact incredibly alterable and vulnerable to manipulation by the government and other anti-revolutionary parties in order to help achieve their goals. Overall, I definitely think my assigned role made me see, and judge the reading through a somewhat more objective lens while trying to assess the strength and possible weaknesses of the reading.

Listening to the Dean groups argument, more than anything, helped me get a better understanding between the terms ‘inhibit’ and ‘enable’. In my opinion, the Dean debate featured more definitive claims and points when compared to Castells. The way they talked about social media and the way that it tends to miss the point and drift off the initial point struck me, given the ALS ice bucket challenge example. But considering all things, I do not believe that my view on social media and sociopolitical change a whole lot because the things that were mentioned and supported were already somewhat in my radar and therefore inspired no actual difference to the way I think on these matters.

Before the debate, as a member of the assessing team, I read the Dean’s article to find evidence for both FOR and AGAINST perspectives. I actually used to believe that social media is a kind of platform that enforces sociopolitical change, but when I was reading the Dean’s article, I found out it was easier to provide evidence for the FOR side, for the reason that Dean actually, in her whole article, emphasizes on how social media inhibits sociopolitical change. For example, as for the technology fetishism, people believe that they are contributing a lot online—making their opinion known by others, while they actually do not have the ability to change legislation or start a revolution (Dean 31-32). As for the AGAINST side, Dean actually focuses on American politics, but we, as assessors, argue that whether it is true when applied to the international environment.

During the Dean’s debate, it is undeniable that both teams give abundant examples and strong arguments. As for the FOR side, they provide recent examples such as Ice Bucket Challenge. And the AGAINST side, they mention the Me Too, which is a perfect example to support that social media actually does make a huge change, but in my opinion, they go off the topic a little bit for the reason that they have put too much emphasis on the argument that social media has raised social awareness rather than made any substantial changes.

As for the Castell’s debate, I realize that Castell actually supports social media for the reason that social media help to inform the world about the Egyptian Revolution. But Castell seems to only focus on a small area in the world—Egypt. I think the main difference between Dean’s article and Castell’s article is that Dean puts her emphasis on the US politics while Castell puts his emphasis on the Egyptian Revolution. Different emphasizes and different examples used in these two articles help to support the completely different opinions of Dean and Castell.

After the debate, I believe that social media actually have an important role in the socio-political change, no matter positive or negative. Social media function as a perfect platform for people to know and share their opinions about the sociopolitical events. But it is still obvious that social media only raise our awareness, and it is difficult to change the sociopolitical environment dramatically just by commenting or following others online.

Reference
Dean, Jodi. “Ch.1.Technology: The Promises of Communicative Capitalism.” Democracy and Other Neoliberal Fantasies: Communicative Capitalism and Left Politics. Duck University Press, 2009. 19-48.

Being on the for side in Dean’s reading, I was thrust headfirst into total cynicism for social media causes, though I never had much stock in such movements to begin with. After participating in the debate, I have subjectively determined my position on the matter. At the risk of sounding like a contrarian, it was a total wash. To put it simply, social media can create sociopolitical change, but I still have never seen an instance where it creates a direct, positive change. Dean’s reading tended to favour both sides, as the against side displayed. I felt no strong way about the reading overall: yes, Dean’s readings were prophetic, but due to my cherry picking for points, I feel like my experience has been maligned by the bias of my argument. The opposing side made very salient points, but the subjectivity of the arguments made me question some of them. For instance: The Square was successful in its goals in the short-term, but as of this year, another dictator is squatting in Mubarak’s place. Is that change? This lies in the eye of the beholder, everyone’s answer will be different. This argument was one of the many expressed during the debate, and in truth, there is no easy answer.

The against side presented arguments that I didn’t see coming, in the sense that their arguments were well presented, authentic, and held considerable weight. Presenting rebuttals was troublesome, and the short length of the debate led me to regret my chosen points. As stated earlier, there’s no easy way to debate this topic: many scholars have pointed out the strengths and shortcomings of social media in the modern world, and the topic is heavily divided. While I still stand under the centrist banner of “It’s a wash”, I can easily see people buying into the power of social media for movements, political or otherwise.

Castells’ reading focuses on the Egyptian revolution, giving a frame of reference for the points on social media and its place in sociopolitical change. The focus is razor sharp, and encompasses the Arab Spring in a thorough manner. Dean’s is much more free form, taking examples in a liberal manner with variety. There’s no rigidity in structure. I believe using Dean’s points contributed to a much more ‘open’ discussion. That being said, the debate’s length went by quite quickly, from opening statement to closing. Overall, it was a surprise to be sure, but a welcome one.

The Castells article focuses on the positive ways that social media enables sociopolitical change with the Egyptian Revolution being the key example. He goes through what happened in the revolution and explains the ways that social media was used to the benefit of those participating and fighting for the cause. While reading the piece, it was difficult not to see from Castells’ perspective when he is persuasively writing to make his point, especially because I agreed with some of his points before I read them because I had watched The Square. However, I had to look at what both sides could potentially say because I was on the assessing side and in doing so, I found a few flaws in the article’s argument. I was able to see counter-arguments such as the drowning of voices on big platforms, how easy the internet could be accessible for those who want to sabotage such change, and how the so-called “change” on social media could just talk without action. My perspective didn’t exactly change after the debate but I could see some points for the side against.

My relationship with social media and sociopolitical change has remained, for the most part, the same. I found the documentary The Square to be the most impactful and Castells’ article simply reinforced what I already believed and understood. Listening to the Dean debate did take me out of the Egyptian Revolution to see that maybe the situation that happened in Egypt was a rare case where people’s voices actually did have an impact, compared to Dean’s thoughts that social media creates a space where there are so many voices that no one is taken seriously. It did get me thinking and take the idea of sociopolitical change to my own hands. I find that so many people have important things that need to be seen or spread on social media that never see the light of publicity but when people can come together to talk about the same thing, often the individual voice doesn’t matter. What matters is that there are people that are gathering together to speak out about the same thing and that must count for something.

Manuel Castells’ chapter, ‘The Egyptian Revolution’ focuses on how social media was able to bring about a sociopolitical change in the state of Egypt at a time of political instability and uncertainty.  I was assigned this reading and i was rebutting arguments in favor of the resolution. Since i always knew that i’d be presenting arguments in favor of the resolution, i read the chapter having THAT mindset. In my honest opinion, my perspective on the chapter didn’t really change much because i already agreed to everything Castells mentioned about the importance of social media the chapter.

Castells focuses on the crucial role of technology and social media platforms in what he deems the “internet age”(Castells,67). As his thesis, Castells proposes to suggest some hypotheses, grounded on observation, on the nature and perspectives of networked social movements, with the hope of identifying the new paths of social change in our time.He explores the roles that Facebook, Twitter and the internet play in disseminating information, organizing rallies, planning the occupation of public spaces, and forming collective agendas with which to address the respective movements’ goals.The occupation of public spaces organized through the use of internet and wireless technology over social media networks ultimately changed the traditional protest or demonstration into what Castells and many others call the new social movement. The hybrid nature of these movements is what made them different and arguably stronger than their traditional counterparts.

While listening to the opposing group didn’t completely change my opinion on the importance of social media to bring about sociopolitical change, it certainly did lead me to think about how in earlier times, traditional movements actually DID take place without the use of social media. There were some real life examples used by the opposition which did prove to be compelling arguments for eg. how the Chinese revolution was a massive success even though it was set in a time where social media wasn’t prevalent and how social media did prove to be a slight hindrance in the 2016 US presidential elections.

One major difference between Castells and Dean’s perspective on social media was how they viewed it. Castells believed that social networking platforms like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube were used to document the spontaneous demonstrations that erupted across the country to help spread the message for change, and to connect with fellow protesters. Using these mediums, they successfully organized the occupation of symbolic public spaces like the Tahrir Square.The combination of internet activism and thorough, non-stop coverage from Al Jazeera which worked with protesters in trading information together helped strengthen and magnify the movement. Dean on the other hand viewed social media as something that was extremely frivolous and believed that content on such sites were not taken seriously. While many social movements were touted as “raising awareness”, in reality, such movements help nothing but the egos of those running them. At best, they were hollow facades that advance nothing, and actively harm the movements they “support” at worst. By examining the flaws of the most popular social movements, it will be clear that social media was unable to effectively contribute to sociopolitical change.

In conclusion, this debate was an interesting activity that helped bring to life various contrasting views on social media and also helped expand one’s thinking horizon.

As per Dean’s Article, it all began with a series of replies with the George W. Bush’s administration. Dean was able to put out her point stating her argument with the due success of Neoliberal. For the debate I was in FOR Dean’s article emphasizing Neoliberal Globalization hence I read the article with that point of view. The article stated that social media not inhibits rather than enhances sociopolitical changes. I had taken the role of speaking the closing statement. Throughout the reading Dean’s point of view was 10 years ago which kind of still strongly relates. Dean’s argument did affect my opinions somehow. It changed my perspective in how people blindly follow up things. As I stated in my closing statement regarding the ALS Ice bucket challenge, it has collected a lot of funds but not because people wanted to bring a change or donate for the cause it was more like a mandatory post for one’s social media account. I will admit I wasn’t even concerned about ALS, the only highlight was ICE BUCKET CHALLENGE. I also agree social media is a platform where you can’t judge if a matter is true or false. But everyone is clever enough to figure it out in some time now.

The opposing team had presented few examples such as the Arab Spring and Me Too. They didn’t really talk about Me Too much which turned out to be their weaker point to my perspective. Me Too was a perfect example to raise the bar between the arguments as through social media there a change bought in people’s life. However, the AGAINST team didn’t really impact because my view was almost similar to theirs. After all we are in the millennial era. Everyone follows social media more than anything and aware whatever is viral or not. If the issue really matters or is real with the help of social media there can be change in the society. Though the FOR arguments did make sense because even if the social media is bringing a sociopolitical change, people may be participating for it but there are quite few out there who are really concerned and majority of the users aren’t even aware of their situations it’s more like they want to participate the trend. . But I believe I am 50-50% agreement with both the stands.

The second debate was on Manuel Castells’ chapter, ‘The Egyptian Revolution’. It focused on how social media helped in informing the world about Egypt’s sociopolitical change.  The difference between both the arguments in Castell’s supported the usage of social media platform like Facebook, Twitter and youtube while Dean clearly stood out against this platform.

However, this debate was a fun activity which helped in learning different perspectives and makes a person understand the usage of social media for sociopolitical change much easier.

Before the debate, I found the article accurately outlines the problems of American politics and the media surrounding it. I found Dean’s argument pretty compelling, but my experience as an international person outside of American politics meant I already had a different perspective, especially considering social media played a huge role in the 2018 Malaysian General Elections and it’s because of social media that we were able to vote out the incumbent government and vote in the opposition for the very first time since the formation of Malaysia. So already I viewed Dean’s argument as reflective of the state of affairs in the US, but it is not necessarily applicable internationally, especially since we have widely different political situations and priorities. Whilst preparing for the debate as an assessor, I read the article with the intention of analyzing both sides of the resolution. It’s a continuation of my prior perspective on the article in my initial reading.

Before working on this debate, I had a fairly simplified understanding of the relationship between social media and sociopolitical change. After seeing the debates, I had a slightly more nuanced understanding of this relationship. Listening to Castells’ debate seemed to confirm some of my own perspectives on the relationship, especially in regards to my personal experience witnessing the recent Malaysian General Elections. A lot of the connections and unity in Castells’ article I did witness on a milder scale back in Malaysia, especially with a lot of the voting efforts being coordinated over social media. We were updated in real time what was happening at the polls around the country, and people coordinating as well to keep elections fair. Particularly Dean’s perspective introduced a different side to social media, as it was really helpful in detailing the fragmentation and stalemate in American politics on social media, the concept of “technological fetishism” was fairly illuminating in how social media could be used to pacify the political energy of the public. A significant difference of both articles is the immense unity in Castells’ perspective contrasted with the fragmentation and dispersion in Dean’s perspective.

Since its release in April 2011, Snapchat has had many updates and remodelling such as the addition of stories, infinite snap time, stickers for decorating, lenses, and many other features added to improve the user experience. In 2015, the app began to count the number of consecutive days that users snapped each other, later being called “streaks”. This number was marked with a small flame emoji next to the names of the user’s friends. Initially, it seemed like something that would be coincidental, something that was interesting but just there as an indicator that you had snapped a person within 24 hours of them snapping you for a couple of days. However, as Snapchat has become more popular, streaks have become the normal way many teens use the app to interact with each other. 

The “streak” has become a constant type of snapchat that teens send and receive. What was once an indictor of casual communication has become a marker of friendships and loyalties. A majority of teens now will wake up in the morning with many snapchats from their friends that are “streaks”, a snapchat only sent to preserve and keep the number going. They range from person to person. Some are morning selfies, pictures from their window, or even black screens with a single “S”. Either way, these “streaks” are sent to keep it going, not necessarily because a user wants to send something to a friend of theirs. This concept has taken over the way Snapchat is used and made us more robotic. 

Stephen Marche’s article, Is Facebook Making Us Lonely? asks the question if our social media presence is changing our real life presence? Is the media made to help us be more social and communicate, isolating us and making us lonely? In terms of Snapchat, it seems so. The streaks are only being kept for the number, not the friendship. Often users will have streaks with people that they aren’t very close with in person, with their streak being one of the only connections they have with each other. It has created a new dynamic that builds on the idea of having a fake social media presence that does not translate to real life. Similarly with Facebook, users add friends that might only be acquaintances, building up a false sense of friendship and commitment to their person. Streaks have taken out the fun of Snapchat and created another social platform ruled by numbers. 

WORK CITED

Kostovetshy, Kathryn. “I Broke All Of My Snapchat Streaks And You Should Too”. The Odyssey Online, 2018, https://www.theodysseyonline.com/broke-all-of-my-snapchat-streaks-and-you-should-too. Accessed 7 Nov 2018.

Marche, Stephen. “Is Facebook Making Us Lonely?”. The Atlantic, 2018, https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/05/is-facebook-making-us-lonely/308930/. Accessed 8 Nov 2018.

Molloy, Mark. “Who Owns Snapchat And When Was It Created?”. The Telegraph, 2018, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/0/owns-snapchat-created/. Accessed 4 Nov 2018.

Vega, Nick. “I Just Lost A 159-Day Snapchat Streak And I Couldn’t Be Happier”. Business Insider, 2018, https://www.businessinsider.com/snapchat-streak-lost-couldnt-be-happier-2017-8. Accessed 6 Nov 2018.

In the discussion on social media, as one of the many ways we interact with one another, what is often overlooked is the contribution of music media platforms. SoundCloud is an example of this kind of medium, being an online audio distribution platform that enables users to upload and promote their work. More simply, SoundCloud is a place where musicians can share their own music with a fanbase that the application generates based on a social-media-like following. Essentially, its purpose is to marry the idea of social media with the concept of music artistry. This is a bold gesture, and for that, SoundCloud received its praise, gaining much popularity in today’s age, especially during 2016, as more independent musicians are searching for a place to publish their artwork freely.

SoundCloud is a common starting point for emerging artists, because of how accessible it is in comparison to iTunes and Spotify’s legal process that requires a formal registration and payment to publish music. It is made very clear, though, that it is nothing more than that – a starting point. Much of SoundCloud’s popularity rests in the fact that it is accessible and free. Ironically then, this very quality earns SoundCloud its reputation as an illegitimate platform for real artists.

Stemming from this idea arose the microgenre, “SoundCloud rap”, or otherwise “mumble rap”, encompassing a certain calibre of artistry – one that is simple, incomprehensible and ultimately lame. Mumble rap puts little emphasis on quality and lyricism and much on sex, drugs, and money.

But isn’t that all rap?

Arguably, yes.

When discussing social media, the discussion on culture cannot be excluded. Social media is not only a useful tool to spread and share media. It is something that “hints at a cultural mindset” (Holmes) and has cultural implications – the ability to influence cultural and social dynamics. Born from this huge influx of mediocre artists trying to make money from songs that are anemic in content, is the unique persona, the “SoundCloud rapper”. More important than SoundCloud itself is the implications of this aesthetic, which all legitimate rappers despise. Their antagonism derives from their shame in the image that new “SoundCloud rappers” are painting for the genre itself. It is believed that “Soundcloud is home to an entire nation of rappers with colored dreads, melodies inspired by 2000s Emo and Pop Punk and the latest mutations of Atlanta’s Trap” (Holmes). And though it is still a social media phenomenon, SoundCloud has angered many qualified artists in the music industry and proved to be problematic. By introducing (or at least trying to introduce) a completely new the dynamic to the music industry, not only did SoundCloud and the “SoundCloud rapper” aesthetic cheapen the act of publishing music online, but it also cheapened the quality of that music, inviting almost anyone to the music industry – an industry that is highly, highly competitive.

Works Cited:

Holmes, Charles. “The Who’s Who Of SoundCloud Rap.” Complex, Complex, 28 Sept. 2018, www.complex.com/music/2018/09/soundcloud-rappers-you-should-know/.

Maintaining relevance in popular culture is a priority for all brands, and the marketing strategy of adhering to a prevalent political movement to appear culturally aware is far from new. For instance, the tactic was famously employed by Coca-Cola in its 1971 “I’d Like to Buy the World a Coke” commercial and was more recently practiced by Nike in its latest campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick. However, in 2017, Pepsi’s attempt at this form of marketing engendered controversy and proved to be a major misstep. The ad features Kendall Jenner modelling amidst a mass protest which resembles those of the Black Lives Matter movement. The reality star turned supermodel is then shown joining the protest, which Pepsi attempted to keep nondescript by depicting protesters holding signs with generic messages of peace and unity. After a slew of problematic images, such as the one of Jenner mindlessly handing her wig to an African American woman without making eye contact, the commercial ends with Jenner approaching the police and handing them a Pepsi uniting them forever and effectively saving the day. Aside from being idealistic, this ad may seem innocuous. However, the major problem lies in the fact that the image of Jenner echoes that of Ieshia Evans standing up to police in a brave act of protest. Outrage ensued on social media with people claiming that the ad, which incidentally was produced by an entirely Caucasian team, trivializes the Black Lives Matter movement.

In the face of backlash, Pepsi initially attempted to defend the commercial stating that the ad “reflects people from different walks of life coming together in a spirit of harmony.” However, after backlash failed to cease on social media, the soda company released an apology: “Clearly we missed the mark and we apologize. We did not intend to make light of any serious issue.” While I genuinely believe that Pepsi’s intent was not to trivialize the Black Lives Matter movement, I maintain that there attempt to profit from it is equally problematic. The company thought it would benefit them economically to assert their cultural awareness by using imagery of a movement that is “in vogue”. What Pepsi failed to realize however, is that Black Lives Matter and other such movements are not trends. In reality, these movements are brave acts of frustration necessitated by the discrimination felt everyday by marginalized groups. Discrimination that does not disappear with a gulp of soda.

It is important to note that much of the backlash over this ad occurred online. In a sense, social media’s accessibility and reach allowed a larger volume of people to speak out on this issue to a greater, more influential audience at a speed that would be otherwise impossible. In turn this allowed the withdrawal of the ad, and Pepsi’s course correction to occur just as quickly. This is a clear example of the ways in which social platforms can act in a positive way by giving rise to a wider and more diverse set of voices. However, social media can, and did, also serve to magnify the outrage culture that is prevalent in today’s society. For instance, in the wake of the ad, Kendall Jenner has been labelled a racist. While the commercial is indeed tone-deaf, I would argue that to label Jenner a racist goes one step too far. In fact, I would argue that this type of accusatory language, which is easily and anonymously distributed via social media, thwarts productive and educational conversations. Instead, those on the receiving end of online vitriol become defensive and/or reclusive, as was the case with both Pepsi and Jenner. From my perspective, the ad was not made in an act of racism as much of the online debate suggests, but rather in an act of ignorance and self-interest on the part of both Pepsi and Jenner. Furthermore, while much of the backlash has been directed at Jenner herself, the lion share of the blame lies with Pepsi’s marketing team who thought it appropriate to monetize the pain and frustration of others. Jenner’s culpability, on the other hand, lies in her lack of thought.

References:

https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/58e4135516000021004d8c15.jpeg?ops=scalefit_630_noupscale

Bale, Miriam. “Critic’s Notebook: The Real Problem With Kendall Jenner’s Pepsi Ad.” The Hollywood Reporter, The Hollywood Reporter, 10 Aug. 2017, www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/critics-notebook-real-problem-kendall-jenners-pepsi-ad-991932.

Sanghani, Radhika. “Pepsi Ad: Everything That’s Wrong with THAT Kendall Jenner Video.” The Telegraph, Telegraph Media Group, 5 Apr. 2017, www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/pepsi-ad-everything-wrong-kendall-jenner-video/.

D’Addario, Daniel. “Kendall Jenner Pepsi Ad: Why It’s a Glaring Misstep.” Time, Time, 5 Apr. 2017, time.com/4726500/pepsi-ad-kendall-jenner/.

Newbold, Alice. “Kendall Responds To Pepsi Ad Criticism.” Vogue, British Vogue, 4 Sept. 2017, www.vogue.co.uk/article/kendall-jenner-responds-to-pepsi-ad.

Kylie, Kendall and. YouTube, YouTube, 4 Apr. 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA5Yq1DLSmQ.